תלמוד על שביעית 5:16

Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Immi: A roasted egg of Samaritans is permitted⁵¹There is no suspicion that it not be kosher.. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Samaritans’ dishes are permitted. This is what you say about a dish usually made without wine or vinegar. Therefore if it is certain that he put some in, it is forbidden even for usufruct⁵²Samaritan wine is forbidden as if it were Gentile wine.. As what had been stated: In earlier times they used to say, why is the wine of Ogdor forbidden? Because of Kefar-Pagesh, and of Burgata because of the Saracen tower, and of the Kushit spring because of Kefar Shalem⁵³These places are not identified; also it is not clear whether the wine of the first mentioned locality is forbidden because it is Samaritan close to the second one settled by Gentiles, or that the first locality is Jewish and the second Samaritan. Kefar Shalem may be the place mentioned in Gen. 33.18 as situated near Sichem.. They changed to say, open it⁵⁴Wine sold in open amphoras since there is no controlling who might have touched it. is everywhere forbidden, sealed it is permitted. Perforated and repaired it is like sealed, Rebbi Isaac ben Ḥaqula said, it is like open. Rebbi Ḥanina said, I can confirm. If it has a cavity on it⁵⁵This translation is tentative; it is offered as an educated guess. The proposal of Pene Moshe to read קירי “cera, wax” instead of יקיר is not very convincing; a wax seal can easily be counterfeit. The explanation of M. Sokoloff, to read here as at other places “worth, expense” is even less convincing; it seems illogical to assume that wine was not tampered with because it was expensive. The explanation given is based on Arabic وقر “cavity”. If the clay seal on top of the amphora is not plane it probably is original, if it is smooth it may have been tampered with. it was not opened, otherwise it was opened. As the following: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar went to the city of Samaria⁵⁶In the Babli, Ḥulin6a, he was sent by R. Meїr to buy wine from Samaritans.. The scribe came to him. He told him, bring me a closed jug⁵⁷Of wine to drink.. He answered him, there is a spring in front of you, drink. He importuned him; he said, there is a spring in front of you, drink. When he saw that he was going to importune him, he told him, if you are master of yourself, there is a spring in front of you, drink. But if your soul brings you to rebellion, you are going to swallow a knife if you are too covetous⁵⁸Prov. 23:2.. The Samaritans already are degenerate⁵⁹This projects the Amoraic development of separation of Jews from Samaritans into Tannaitic times (and it was not complete even in Fatimid Egypt.).

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of the House of Hillel is that people eat from their olives while they are being loaded into the oil vat¹²⁸Olives when harvested are put into large vats called מעטן, to be transported to the oil press. Dry food cannot become impure. The olives can become impure only if their oil starts to flow; the lowest olives in the vat will start to exude fluid even before being emptied into the oil press. Then they and all olives wetted by them may become impure. But the top olives may be eaten dry; it is possible that the buyer will eat some of them while in a state of purity even if the buyer is impure. Hence, there is no logical necessity that the sale will result in the olives made impure., as a subterfuge. The House of Hillel follow their own opinion, as we have stated¹²⁹Mishnah Ševiït 5:8. The first sentence is labelled as opinion of the House of Shammai in the Mishnah. The House of Shammai argue that nobody would buy cattle trained for ploughing in a Sabbatical year unless he intends to use it then.: “One should not sell him a ploughing cow in the Sabbatical year, but the House of Hillel permit this because he may slaughter it.” Do people really slaughter their cattle¹³⁰Cattle trained for ploughing and still vigorous are much too valuable to be slaughtered as food.? As a subterfuge. They agree that one may sell ears of grain¹³¹In the Rome ms. (and R. S. Cirillo), the reason is given: כדי חייו, necessities of life may be sold to everybody. The problems start only with large quantities, as indicated in the next paragraph. for dough even though one knows that the buyer will not prepare the dough in purity.

MISHNAH: If a baker works in impurity one does not knead with him¹⁴⁴For kneading one must wet the flour; this prepares it for impurity and, in an impure bakery, makes the dough impure. nor form the bread with him¹⁴⁵The dough already is impure when it is formed; this prohibition falls under the general prohibition “to support sinners.”, but one may bring bread to the seller¹⁴⁶Greek πρατήρ (Buxtorf) or πωλητήρ (Krauss) “seller”. with him¹⁴⁷Since the bread is fully baked, transporting it is not “to support sinners.”.

MISHNAH: ²⁴⁴The entire Halakhah is from Ševiʻit 5:9, Notes 80–98. The variant ms. readings from there are noted ש. The last two paragraphs are also from Ševiʻit 4:3, Notes 50–57. A woman may lend to her neighbor, whom she suspects in matters of the Sabbatical, a coarse sieve⁸⁰This is also quoted as Rebbi’s opinion in the Babli, Ketubot 69a., a fine sieve, grindstones, or an oven⁸¹Mishnah Ketubot 4:6., but she should neither cull nor grind with her. The wife of a Fellow may lend to the wife of a vulgar⁸²In the Babli, Ketubot 51a, the question never arises since the claims of the widow and the daughters are accorded equal status; this rule is quoted in Yebamot 15:3 (14d 1.68), Ketubot 4:8 (29a 1.25). a coarse sieve and a fine sieve, she may cull, grind, and sift with her, but she may not touch hers once water has been put in⁸³The Text is from Ketubot 4:8, Notes 200–201. Variant readings are given there. because one does not support transgressors⁸⁴Mishnah Ševuʻot 6:1. The subject is the biblical oath imposed on a person who denies an obligation (Ex. 22:8). The rabbinic interpretation of the expression אֲשֶׁר יֹאמַר כִּי הוּא זֶה is “if he [the defendant] agrees that there is a case.” If the defendant in a civil suit, in which there are no witnesses and no documents, denies the entire claim, he does not have to swear a biblical oath (he may have to swear a rabbinical oath). But if he agrees to part of the claim, he has to swear a biblical oath to free himself from the remainder. Only if the claim is advanced as tentative, then any admission by the defendant is a gift to the claimant and by rabbinic rule no oath of any kind is due.. All this has only been said for communal peace. One⁸⁵The speaker is the claimant. encourages Gentiles in the Sabbatical year but not Jews. One greets them for communal peace.

HALAKHAH: “If somebody buys crockery from a Gentile,” etc. “²⁰⁵Babli 75b, Tosephta 8:2. In these texts, the formulation is much more clear. If a vessel is new, one simply immerses it. If it was used cold like cups, one washes them clean. If it was used hot or for cooking, it has to be cleansed by boiling water. If somebody buys crockery from a Gentile, something of which he knows that it is used for human food, he washes them clean and they are pure. But pots and boiling kettles²⁰⁶Latin cucuma. one cleanses in boiling water. All of these, if he used them even if he did not immerse them, or cleansed them in boiling water, or rubbed them clean, or made them glowing white in fire, they are pure.” Rebbi Hoshaia said, one has to immerse them²⁰⁷One has to immerse any vessel bought from a Gentile to convert it to a Jewish vessel. In the Babli (Note 205) this is one version of the preceding baraita; another version denies the obligation., as by the following. Rebbi Immi and Rebbi Jehudah the Prince went down to the hot springs of Gadara²⁰⁸The place were calendar computations and proclamations were held and all leading scholars of the time came together. The names of persons involved here are probably corrupt. R. Immi cannot ask for instruction from R. Jeremiah, the student of his colleagues R. Yasa’s student R. Ze`ira. and borrowed silverware from the family Osinos²⁰⁹From the context it appears that these were Gentiles.. They asked Rebbi Jeremiah who said, one must immerse them because they left the impurity of Gentiles and entered the holiness of Israel²¹⁰This opinion is not found in any other source.. He went out and we want to learn²¹¹While the meaning of the sentence is clear, the text is corrupt and cannot be vocalized to make sense as it stands. The people who asked R. Jeremiah did not accept his ruling, they decided to look around for other opinions. Possibly then the sentence was נֵצֵא לַחוּץ וְנִלְמַד “let us go out and study.”. They left and heard Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: they said only “who buys”, but the borrower is permitted²¹²In the Babli, loc. cit., a statement of R. Naḥman (bar Jacob).. Then even vessels²¹³New earthenware vessels, not covered by reference to Num. 31:21–24.. Rebbi Hoshaia bought vessels and immersed them²¹⁴As a matter of practice, not theoretical obligation..